We're so early, LND doesn't even support loopback \ stacker news ~lightning

pull down to refresh

We're so early, LND doesn't even support loopback github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/7419

2420 sats \ 21 comments \ @ek 24 Oct lightning

Being able to pay your own invoices without routing would be great for Stacker News. With such a loopback, stackers paying each other with CCs can be implemented just like p2p payments. However, this is not something LND supports yet. It always has to create a route for each payment.

Self payments are possible using --allow-circular-route and --allow_self_payment but they still route through the lightning network. You can't do this without channels.

A chance for SN to contribute back to LND? 👀

view all related items

397 sats \ 2 replies \ @fanis 24 Oct

IIRC LNBits circumvented this by intercepting invoices before handing them to LND, and processing "to-self" invoices separately as database-only transfers. But it would indeed be nice if LND had it baked in, instead of everybody that has a use case for it reimplementing the feature.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 25 Oct

intercepting invoices before handing them to LND

This is the correct way, we do this in Lightning.Pub too... LND is a Lightning implementation, not a service middleware

That said, LND does indeed have raw HTLC interception built-in, apparently SN isn't using it

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 25 Oct

That said, LND does indeed have raw HTLC interception built-in, apparently SN isn't using it

we don't, we wrap invoices and add our fee in JS

may the dynamic types be with us

114 sats \ 3 replies \ @south_korea_ln 24 Oct

Wait, how would this work? You'd have to bring funds from one of your channels into another one without going through a peer, no? This would require some onchain swapping? Or at least, increasing the size of one of the channels? I'm probably missing sth there...

111 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek OP 24 Oct

This wouldn't be implemented as a protocol thing, so no channels involved.

I just want to do the equivalent of accessing localhost without requiring access to the internet but lightning requires real channels and real routes for every payment—no exceptions.

44 sats \ 0 replies \ @JesseJames 24 Oct

You still routing outside to your channel peers, no? You also set the prices for your channels, It would be nice but still it ain't purely "localhost" style, tbh... --allow_self_payment, --outgoing_chan_id --last_hop and --fee_limit are your friends but still....

44 sats \ 0 replies \ @south_korea_ln 24 Oct

Ok. I'll let that one sink in. Tnx

33 sats \ 1 reply \ @Filiprogrammer 24 Oct

Does anything speak against decoding the invoice and checking whether the payee public key is the same as the public key of the own node and then just not doing a payment through LND, but instead just moving around some numbers in the internal database?

And to prevent anyone else from paying the invoice afterwards, you can use the CancelInvoice RPC call: https://api.lightning.community/api/lnd/invoices/cancel-invoice/index.html

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 24 Oct

but instead just moving around some numbers in the internal database?

That's probably how we're going to do it. It would just be nice if we wouldn't need a workaround for this as others have mentioned in the issue.

32 sats \ 0 replies \ @Slestak_Jack 24 Oct

Too many chef's in the kitchen trying to do rocket surgery.

2017 sats \ 10 replies \ @DarthCoin 24 Oct

If SN would listen to me and implement a LNDHUB system (like in LNBits) , all this could be avoided. But they don't. I scream out loud from the beginning of SN: implement LNDHUB for stackers.

156 sats \ 9 replies \ @ek OP 24 Oct

But they don't.

LNDHub is custodial.

1000 sats \ 8 replies \ @DarthCoin 24 Oct

474 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek OP 24 Oct

Just what I thought. You usually don't listen to what our requirements are and suggest solutions that are clearly incompatible with what we're trying to do, sometimes to the degree it looks like trolling. But it's funny so go ahead.

👀

142 sats \ 0 replies \ @nerd2ninja 24 Oct

I for one am excited to head west into the undeveloped wilderness of using a website where you pay creators without depositing to the website first (although we already have it with NOSTR, but still its very much a wilderness)

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @OneOneSeven 24 Oct

1017 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 24 Oct

sometimes to the degree it looks like trolling

define trolling Just commenting your posts is trolling now? btw I PAID SATS FOR COMMENTING.

17 sats \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 24 Oct

Somebody have to tell you that you are on the wrong path...

65 sats \ 2 replies \ @BlokchainB 24 Oct

You know you can always fork SN and implement all the changes and operate it exactly as you wish instead of just hounding ek and Koob to do your bidding.